tv [untitled] February 10, 2012 4:48pm-5:18pm PST
i do not know if it increases vandalism or graffiti. do i still have 28 seconds? i will wrap it up and say i request you deny the appeal and allow the construction work to proceed so we can have access to the building. thank you very much. >> i have several questions for you. the first question is, did you have a survey add-odone to showe differential of the side were verses the 3 spaces -- the sidewalk versus the three spaces? >> i surveyed it myself.
>> during the time of the rebuttal, you may want to take a look at your plan. some of those allegations do not appear to be correct based on the photos. based upon your analysis, what is the differential? what is the range between the finished floor and the sidewalk, and immediately outside? >> if they range from 5 inches to 9 inches. >> of the options that you looked at, the more common one would have been toward the sidewalk -- it appears from a
cursory view the based upon that, it looks as if it can work. >> we actually looked at and warping the sidewalks, and that was one of our first conversations. nick agreed that was not a viable option, mainly because of the store. >> what about the others bowman -- the other two? >> we could have done 5 inch steps are believed. i think they would have allowed that, but the problem was to get all free with a solution that work for all free, so that is why we went with the the rays sidewalk, which is on
characteristic. there are two others in the city. one is between jefferson and fisherman's wharf, and the other is at the zen center. >> if you would take a look of the numbers you have for elevation atthink they make senn what you talked about. >> i will take a look. >> can you tell us the status of the lawsuit that you talked about? >> all i know is what i see on line about it, that it was filed in november of 2010. and that it is still ongoing. two of the defendants have been released from the lawsuit, resolve that. but the other parties are all still, as far as i know, in progress. my understanding was that it somewhat dependent on what the
outcome of this hearing and the decision on whether or not they can do this route or not -- ramp or not. >> you really presented just one option which was to modify the interior space. it seems like this is a common problem around the city. the examples you gave are certainly unusual. it is a residential area, it deals with the raise the storefront, it is down on jefferson street where that happens, pretty a typical type of space that is there. this seems like a highly unusual solution to modify the sidewalk significantly to accommodate this. i think there has got to be other options to explore.
this is a busy street, a busy area that is getting busier. i know i have travelled down there a lot, there are more pedestrians putting bifurcated sidewalks with a gate or fence in the middle of it seems like an odd thing to do when the city is trying to improve sidewalks and make them more usable and the building parklets. >> i actually live very close by here, off of sixth avenue. when i first met with nick down here, we agreed that this particular part of clement street is fairly -- at the end of the street, it has much less traffic. we think of the busy activity along other parts, and there are very few people going down the sidewalk. i have been there many times and
i have not seen a lot of foot traffic. we did look at other options, and i am showing you on the screen here. we also looked a five-foot wide walk away. >> that is the same solution as moving the walkway somewhere else. the 1906 drawings you show how, it could have been area to use, but when was that modified to bring entry to the storefront to the property line? that is normally how it is solved in the vestibule area. >> i think there was a step there, even in the 1906 plans.
[talking over each other] i don't actually have that information. the other option that we did look out was warping the sidewalk, but we did not brought it up, it is just part of public works. we talked about what the slope would meet the. part of public works doesn't come around to this solution because they are resistant to doing it this way initially. and they realize that to do it, to get of these that would be really problematic. >> i have a couple of questions. the 8 ft to 5 ft differential was rejected. hughes said that dtw didn't want -- did not think that the five-
foot accommodation was going to be sufficient? >> my understanding was that by having the sidewalk be a foot wide, the railing was in line with all of the street furniture that is closer to the curb like the trees, the newspaper stands, all of that. if we move it closer to the building, you end up with a rail that if you are not paying attention, you might end up walking right into the rail at your traversing down the street. >> i think i don't understand the parking peace. i am having a hard time understanding how that is an issue. if you are parking at a slant and you need to get on the curb any way, you need to find a curb cut if you have a wheelchair.
>> sorry, none of these essays -- spaces are wheelchair accessible. what i am imagining is that people who would be parking here would be able-bodied or if they have hawkers or crutches or other mobility aids. they may have wheelchairs', but these are not designated parking spaces for people with disabilities. d're just regular parking spaces. >> how does the ramp and packed parking? -- impact parking? >> when you go from the street up to the curb, there is only 4.5 feet before you encounter the railing. the concern is that you have to go around the tree wells and
into the property of all types above the sidewalk. the current configuration of the doors are established at the property line. so under the law has established, there must be a level landing. there would typically be a minimum of 4 feet by 4 feet landing. there are specifically for by for landing areas that is required. that places the sidewalk between 5 inches and 9 inches higher. what happened is, in order to
make it work, we worked it without needing that and valleys. in this specific case, it does not provide enhancements to the sidewalk. it creates more problems for pedestrians. they are dealing with going up and down accordingly. whereas if we extend the sidewalk and the landing, it will be through that area. we wanted the railing to be placed closer to where the edges of the trees are maximize the sidewalk with cannot have this intermittent barrier sitting right in the middle of the sidewalk where people might run into.
within the last several days, we received feedback from the mayor's office of disability where the wishes to provide a courtesy struck where people can actually access the sidewalk. if the commission does of told the department's issuance of the permit, we will be requiring the applicant to modify the red. -- ramp. it will provide a 3 foot walking area behind that sidewalk for it to work with the vehicles. it will provide an opportunity to decide if they want to go through the slightly raised iran. this is a very challenging situation, specifically because of how the existing configuration is set up.
there are literally swings at a property line. it is also possible that they will be showing up word. there lies the challenge that there isn't much room to work with if we can establish the threshold. there were comments as it relates to from the appellant about vandalism, about garbage cans, and being placed in the public right of way. i have noted that the property owner is responsible for this facility. they are required to maintain it, it is a swing. we will be requiring the railing to satisfy the building held which requires a much tighter spacing in these kinds of cases. as it relatesç to -- they are
allowed to be placed of the night before pickup and must be removed for businesses immediately on the following day. we do not expect that to be a problem specifically in this case. we understand that this is a significant challenge for this location, i do, when i was younger, did attend roosevelt middle school for a while and i know this area. from my recollection and from the site visit, the pedestrian volumes as such is relatively low and we believe that this provides both a benefit to the property owner as well as the general public in order for them to access these businesses in
the specific case. i am ready to answer any questions you might have. >> if you are interested in the solution that the department is proposing, it would need to be something that you do as a condition to the sperm that. it is not something yothe department could do later. the matter is yours. >> the department has guidelines for the warping of sidewalks on sloping sides. the more common one is where it is used for garages. there is some latitude allowed in those related to the slope as compared to what is the normal maximum that you would allow. what is that? >> there are two different
conditions for disability access and modifications. we allowed the existing slope of the street, added to an additional half inch which is an additional 4.2%. if the street has a 5% slope, they could allow the people to extend it to a 9% slow in order to satisfy these accessibility requirements. the maximum is 1 in 12. çthat is correct for lamps that would require railings. this would not be a rapid but rather the sidewalk. >> which is what the code says. if it is 5%, it did not require
the rail. and understood that the city has no accommodations for that on the sloping sides. >> the city of san francisco has very interesting to ' and apology -- topography and topology. businesses are open-heart establishments and we try to accommodate that by working with identifying a way that they can be satisfied. it is really a location by location evaluation working in conjunction with the applicant. and finding a reasonable opportunity or solution. >> the interior solutions that
were shown, has anybody reviewed when they can be minimized or improved upon so that we don't do this on the sidewalk? there is a cheaper and easier solution inside the structure? >> in these cases, the applicant would come to us with a request. obviously, the work inside the property line, we suggest certain things, but we have no authority to specifically direct an applicant to take specific actions. >> who would be out and work with to try to come up with better solutions? i would like to figure out if there are alternative solutions
to work? are people walking down the sidewalk going to encounter a fence? it is less crowded, but it is not a residential area. it is still a pretty vibrant commercial area. >> one of the things, just thinking about it, it can be done. for the applicant to lower the finished hot properties by three or 5 inches that can result, obviously, a lower threshold at the property line. the railing requirements be required to be on the big end of the ramp. ultimately, something could potentially be done. i don't know specifically how it
is established. it is reinforced concrete? i don't know the costs associated. i have to rely upon a professional response to that question. >> we will take public comment. anyone interested, please step forward. how many people are interested in speaking? >> by name is les silverman. we own the building on the same block, but on the corner. we have three storefronts the face clements' street. i want to support the appeal. i feel that the ramp and the
fence represent a major alteration to the traffic on our block and will impact our retailers in a big way. we also have had to lower our rent for the three retailers in the last four years, three years. because of the really poor economy, they are hanging on by a very thin thread. changing the dynamics of the bloc will change the traffic, most definitely. there is a lot of foot traffic. there is a lot of foot traffic in front of our buildings, and retailers depend on it. by putting a fence along the parking, people will definitely walked behind the car's on a very busy street. this will create liability for the city.
a mother or a baby buggy gets run over, the city will be responsible for this because they allowed this ramp to be built. there is a high school right around the corner and every day at 3:00, a port of children, they are not young children, they are teenagers, come pouring out of the high school. they will hang out on this fence. this will impact our retailers and the landowners. they won't be able to move the people, other retailers won't have to. it will be a big problem. the landlord doesn't one home to give up valuable square footage. i think that is the way to go, to lower the base of the four to the sidewalk level.
there are better solutions, and i think they are better for the city and for us. we have had extreme problems with vandalism. we have put planters in front of each store and they have been vandalized eight times. they have been broken and destroyed. we have also had a lot of graffiti. thank you very much. >> any other public comment? we will move into rebuttal. three minutes. >> i just want to show you a picture of -- i appreciate the solution, it looks good on paper, but this is the reality. this is the corner looking down. this railing would be right here. the parking is generally skewed
towards the other corner, which is a bus stop. i am on this corner three or four times a week. i see the traffic, i see people getting out of cars, i drove my mother round when she needed to get out with a walker. i know what it is to try to get somebody out from behind two or three cars, she was very tentative about getting a card out anyway. this is one picture looking down, looking west. this is the property. when i talk about iran and a slow, this is looking east. my property is right here. this grant is going to end right here and it will be fairly steep. i will end up with the debris
rolling into myspace. this is what happens. the bins get taken in. i did not say anything about these been staying outside. a matter of them rolling down or getting kicked over by kids or whoever is, that is an issue. as you can see, this was the most egregious problem. this entrance, no. 11, it is no longer being used. they have rented the space that used to be no. 11. there are only two entrances at this moment. they can combine that into one large store and you have a smaller problem, you don't need 60 feet of concrete rolling down. the foot traffic, if it is like
an owl, we are trying to increase. the comment about very little foot traffic is the issue right now that we're trying to get people to come to that part of the street. a thank-you. -- thank you. >> mr. nathan. >> first, i would like to clarify the question that commissioner fung had about elevations on the curb. i think i understand the problem. in my drawing, i use the word poc, type of curb. that is the top of the curb for the sidewalk, not the street curb.
so the big concern with putting ramps, it would cost many times more money than sidewalks outside. we looked at it and it is very expensive. it involves cutting out the concrete foundation wall, modifications to store front doors, changes toglazing glazin, ramps with handrails. the spaces are very small. installing the interior ramps would involve closing the stores for a least a couple of weeks. there would be a permanent loss of usable rental space for the tenant and the landlord. we would have to get approval for the planning department because it is a building that is more than 50 years old. i think it will be upwards of he the thousand dollars or
$100,000. remember, the owner doesn't want to do any remodeling, they just one of the -- want to do what's readily achievable. they don't have to do more than that. it is a concern if they can do something less expensive and meets requirements. i want to comment that the refuse bins could be placed at the east end of the sidewalk. it can prevent the problems that they are talking about. sunday, it may be again be independent storage as it was before. we don't know how long the current use will be there. [chime] [chime] do i still have 28 seconds?